Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1887-07-01

! prison a lawyer who gets an appeal from
| his decision, but this will never be az long
as the bar maintains Its independence, ana
| with uDfaltering courage advise their clients
what they believe 10 be right.
| WELLS vs.. THE COMMONWEALTH.
"The only ease In Virginia on the subject
| Of contempt Is Wells Us. The Common
wealth, 2lst Grattan, which l commend TO
| your Honors' consideration, which Will snow
| that n lawyer cannot be punished for the
| conscientious discharge Of his duty, whether
| his advice be right or wrong, but Ia this
| case the advice given by Mr.. Cannon was
sustained by the appeal allowed by the SUI
| preme Court OF Appeals. l therefore
insist TINT there can be no possible
| ground upon which this Court can con-
clude that It has the right to punish for
| contempt the action of Mr.. Cannon, the
| counsel, and Mr.. Todd, his client. there
| fore confidently submit that this rule must
be discharged"
no DIsREsPECT INTENDED.
When Judge Christian concluded the
Court asked him II he in anv way intended
any disrespect to the Court by anything he
| bad said, and the Judge replied that he
| did not.
MR.. CANNON.
Mr.. Cannon, after the conclusion OF
| Judge Christians remarks, stated that
under the circumstances he considered II
but decorous and proper that he should APP
! pear by counsel, instead OF in person, to
| respond 10 the rule; that he had not in
| tended TO say word but for remark that
had fallen from the Judge during the
| course OF the debate, which appeared TO
| convey the impression, as he understoodit,
| that the supposed contempt consisted in q
combination between Mr.. Todd and his
counsel 10 depress the sale by reading the pa
per in question, and thereby repressing bids
on the property that might otherwise have
| been made. II this was the real object and
| meaning Of the rule, then be felt 1t his duty
| TO state that such an impression was a
wholly mistaken one, and grossly unjust
both TO Mr.. Todd and his counsel. To
| show how erroneous this view was he
| proceeded to state briefly the history OF
| what had taken place-namely, that when
| the SUperSededS was awarded by the
| Conrt OF Appeals IL was within the
| power Of Mr.. Todd to stop the resale by
| executing the SuperSededS bond, which he
could readily have done; but in view OF
the nature OF the property aud the sur
| rounding circumstances and the public
interests involved, his counsel, after the
fullest consideration, advised him to waive
the SuperSededS and rely upon the appeal
alone.
PROTECTION OF Mr.. TODD.
Mr.. Cannon said that in this condition Of
things, after TIE maturest reflection, they
were OF the opinion that it was necessary
and proper for the protection OF the rights
and interests OF Mr.. Todd that some state
ment should be made at the sale, giving
notice to the company present OF the legal
status OF the case, and that Mr.. Todd did
not acquiesce in the proceedings, but, on
the contrary, insisted on his rights as he
understood them to exist and his determ-
nation to press his claims to q final adjudi-
cation in the Supreme Court.
Especially did they deem this course ne
cessary in view Of the fact that Mr.. Todd
might see fit to bid anew at the resale for
the protection OF his interests in the prem
iSes. That being uncertain whether any
explanatory statement would be made at
the resale by the commissioners or coun-
sci on the other side, they had prepared this
paper in advance to be read ii the circum-
stances should require it.
The fact being that at the sale no eXpla-
nation or statement was made by the com.
missioners or counsel Of the other parties.
the counsel Of Mr.. Todd deemed it abso-
lutely essential to read the paper in ques-
tlon as the only practical manner in which
to give notice to the public OF the legal
status OF the case at that time, as well as the
only mode of enabling Mr.. Todd, with
safety to his rights, TO bid upon the pro-
perty II he should be inclined for the pro-
lection Of his interests so TO do.
no CONTENPT-ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE.
Mr.. Cannon declared that in all this, so
-
i've, being intended, the utmost care was
taken to prevent even the appearance OF
any such purpose, and that in point OF fact
no obstruction TO the sale was Intended, and
nothing contemplated but what seemed TO
them fairness and justice required, and |
this was so understood by everybody pres.
ent at the sale.
THE COURTS COMMENT.
Judge Holiday replied that what he |
(Slr. Cannon) had Just said was much more |
like an answer to the rule than the written |
answer fled 10y Judge Christian.
MR.. ToDD's ANSWER.
After Mr.. Cannon finished his speech the |
answer OF Mr.. Todd, rs follows. was read
"Your respondent, in answer 10 the |
rule issued against him, says that he adopts |
the answer OF his counsel, Edward Y. Can
non, and asks that the same be read as |
part Of his answer; and your respondent |
for further answer says that he acted in |
what was done at the sale mentioned I'M |
der advice of his counsel, Edward Y. |
Cannon and Robert G.. Scott, IN whom |
be had implicit confidence, and all |
that he did in the premises was |
to declare to the public his legal |
rights as advised by his counsel. |
In doing this he submits that he was in no |
way guilty OF contempt Of this Court, |
unless it be held that suitor Is In contempt |
of an inferior court when he obtains an |
appeal from the highest court in his State |
from supposed erroneous decision. |
Adopting everything said by my counsel, |
Edward Y. Cannon, an part OF this answer, |
respectfully ask that the rule against me |
De discharged.
"CHARLEs L. ToDD,
"by Joseph Christian, his counsel"
NO APOLOGY TO MAKE.
Captain Robert g. Scott, OF counsel for |
Mr.. Todd, stated that the protest In ques. |
ton was prepared by Mr.. Cannon and him.
self; that 1t was in his handwriting, aud
he fully approved its contents and advised
its beng read at the sale; that he had no |
desire to diselaim any responsibility for his |
action in the matter, and had no apology 10 |
make IUtIplDTs ludt tt tohN'HiPN,
said he, then make the most OF IT,"
ASKED FOR THE LAW.
Judge Holiday asked Colonel John ii. |
Guy, one OF the commissioners in the case, |
what his opinion was as 10 the law regard
ing the ease.
TECHNICAL CONTEMPT.
Colonel Guy said he forebore 10 say any |
thing about the matter except called on by |
the court as a mieus ctiri9. He was bound
10 say that the paper read atthe sale, having !
a tendency to alarm bidders and obstruct |
the sale, was a technical contempt OF the |
Court; that It was totally different |
from the case OF an outsider who, |
holding some claim upon property |
about TO be sold, undertook to do what he |
was in duty hound to do-namely, give
notice OF his calm TO any probable pur--
chaser and not conceal bis claim and
silently stand by and see the purchaser |
misled. If, however, the Court should be, /
after hearing the parties, Of different
opinion and should consider that
the reading OF the paper itself
did not constitute any contempt, |
the Court ought TO discharge the rule as I'm |
p,ovjdently awarded without requiring any |
purger. On the other hand IL the Court |
stiI regarded the paper and ITS pubic read
Inc at the sale as making prlDid.f fdce case |
OF contempt, II has no alternative but to re- |
quire the parties, II they can do so, to purge |
themselves by sufficient disclaimant.